Bill O'Reilly Wins Evolution Debate Against Athiest Scientist Richard Dawkins
What great points he makes is and that no one can deny is,
1 Science doesn't have all the answers but they refuse to teach alternatives. "Science class is incomeplete."
2 Religion is more moral and science is not.
3 There are more believers than non-believers and that should be taught. And believing in the extra-ordinary act that Jesus did is more powerful than Science's "we'll figure it out and while we don't have all the answers, we'll just ignore religion". And science looks down on religion.
5:49 PM
|
|
This entry was posted on 5:49 PM
You can follow any responses to this entry through
the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response,
or trackback from your own site.
Posts
1 comments:
1 Science doesn't have all the answers but they refuse to teach alternatives. "Science class is incomplete."
Science obviously doesn't have all the answers, but, the answers that are taught in classes have been verified. Any alternatives obviously do not enjoy the same solid backing. For instance, when Creationism can be proven with empirical evidence it will be taught as science. Until then, it will remain a belief not a fact, and the realm of theology class not science class.
2 Religion is more moral and science is not.
I would hardly call religion moral when the Judeo-Christian bible calls on believers to murder people that have sex outside of marriage, and the Koran demands that women who show their face to be executed, but I digress. I wouldn't call science moral either though as it was never meant to be a moral guide. It is simply a collection of facts about the world around us. Other than teaching us not to stick forks in toasters it isn't meant as a life guide.
3 There are more believers than non-believers and that should be taught. And believing in the extra-ordinary act that Jesus did is more powerful than Science's "we'll figure it out and while we don't have all the answers, we'll just ignore religion". And science looks down on religion.
There may be more believers than non-believers but they don't all believe the same thing. They certainly aren't all Christians. Even beliefs within the many Christian sects differ wildly from one another. So, whose religion are you going to teach?
Power is defined as the possession of controlling influence. Christianity has remained largely unchanged for generations at a time. Science on the other hand has developed rapidly since the beginning of recorded history and continues to do so today. So, if you wanted to compare which was more powerful, I'm not sure Christianity has as strong a base as O'reily may think. The FOX network certainly wasn't created miraculously in seven days. Without science, he would be gathering sticks to warm his mud hut right now. Really though, the question of whether science or religion is more powerful is a ridiculous one. Its like asking whether apples or oranges are more powerful.
Post a Comment